God & the Fairy Tree

Some are, some aren't but sure, they tend to be. I have beliefs that are intellectual, one being the belief in god. M=?What does 'M' represent in my post? I haven't added anything and don't even see the phrase 'becauase of' in my post.The question is 'what is the difference' and here is one of the defferences I provided:

quote:

---

There aren't a lot of intellectually mature people saying that the sign is correct and that the fairies do exist like there are for god.

---

Sure but there was a difference explicitly stated: One is an obvious joke and the other is to be taken seriously. The difference is there and the question is why? or What makes them different.Not all people that believe in god aren't intellectually mature. There are a lot of intellectually mature people saying that god does exists while there are not a lot saying that fairies exist.People generally assume that fairies don't exist so the sign is an obvious joke. People don't generally assume that god doesn't exist so it is to be taken seriously.What additional variable have I added?

Pertaining to which is the obvious joke and which is to be taken seriously, yes it's a matter of majority opinion. Then it won't be so obvious that the one is a joke or the other one shouldn't be taken seriously anymore. Of course not. I can see why you can't accept an argumentum ad populum as a reason to take the belief in god seriously, but I think that you should be able to see that this is one of the differnces, the lacking of it, that makes the belief in fairies an obvious joke.If there were lots of people professing belief in fairies, do you think that the sign would have obviously been a joke to you? Well, there are mature minds that believe in god. That should tell you something. I wouldn't expect it to convince you that god exists, but you can tell that it isn't an obvious joke, right?

Is belief in fairies (held by an adult) absurd?

You added the variable of "intellectual maturity" and implied that belief in God is different because theists are "intellectual mature". You haven't established that theists are more "intellectually mature" than fairyists or shown how you can determine "intellectual maturity". I think what the OP suggests is that one is a joke that nobody takes seriously and one is a joke that is taken seriously by theists. The question isn't why they "are" different. The question is why some people think they're different.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

quote:

---

People generally assume that fairies don't exist so the sign is an obvious joke. People don't generally assume that god doesn't exist so it is to be taken seriously.

---

But just becasue a lot of people take an assumption or belief seriously doesn't mean that the particular belief or assumption in question is an intellectually mature belief.For a long time, people generally believed and assumed lots of things that you would laugh at today, and think "My, how silly and childish it was for people to believe that Zeus lived on Mount Olympus, and that Apollo pulled the sun across the sky in his firey chariot. They were so backward and I am so modern."There is no difference whatsoever in the belief that Apollo moves the sun in his chariot and the belief in any other supernatural thing.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Yes - to an extent. But I don't know where fairies originate, but it wouldn't matter to me if an adult believed in fairies.As far as I know they are fairytale. If they were mythical, and claimed to be true, then that would be one similarity with God. ONE.But instead of immediately obeying your desire to compare them with God - check the composition of each belief and what it involves. Why would an adult believe in God? Why would adults generally not believe in fairies?1. Do adults care about feeding the poor? Clothing them? visiting the sick, loving their fellow man, preaching hope to those with nothing, etc..etc..?2. Tell me, do fairies involve such matters, or are they mind-candy for babas?( NOTE: Not that this proves God is not made-up and fairies are. As I said earlier - I expect God to be treated equally as any magical claim.)

The variable of intellectual maturity was in the op, I didn't add it.I'm not saying that belief in god is neccessarily intellectually mature. I'm saying that there are people who are intellectual mature who also believe in god, so belief in god can be intellectually mature.There aren't people who are intellectually mature who believe in fairies (well there might be some, but for the purpose of this thread we can assume there are none, or not enough to matter at least). This doesn't mean that the belief in fairies cannot be intellectually mature, just that it currently isn't. The ability to determine intellectual maturity is assumed in the op so I don't feel the need to show how I can determine it.I'm not even claiming that theists are more intellectually mature than fairyist. I'm saying that there are a lot of people who are intellectually mature that believe in god while there are not a lot of people who are intellectually mature that believe in fairies. I'm not comparing the intellectual maturity of theists and fairyists to each other.

Yes - this begs the question. You've assumed God is a joke because atheists think he is a joke. If this was self-evident - there would be a God-tree.God isn't clearly a joke. All I've heard is people state that he is because fairies are to people.Think about that in a formal context;All people generally think fairies are a joke.Therefore God is a joke.

So?The argumentum ad populum is enough to take the belief seriously but it does not establish intellectual maturity. That the belief can be taken seriously makes it no longer obvious that the belief is a joke.I'm saying that being intellectually mature and having the belief allows it to be taken seriously, not that being taken seriousy makes it intellectually mature.

---

No difference whatsoever between any other supernatural thing? Yeah right Too bad that's off topic.

I'm reminded of the difference between a fairy tale and an oilfield (or cowboy, or fisherman) story: a fairy tale starts with "Once upon a time..." and an oilfield story with "Now this ain't no shit...."Religion/God stories tend to start with a prettified version of the latter.

The OP speaks of intellectual immaturity. You seem to be claiming that "other" maturity cancels out some of the immaturity. If somebody is generally mature, it doesn't follow that all (or any) of his beliefs are mature.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Not all jokes are clear. The topic isn't about the clarity of humour. It's about why some people "get" some jokes and other people don't.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Einstein said: "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler"You have gone and made a simple argument too simple, Mike. The particular argument is about the beliefs and the reasoning behind the Pink Unicorn and God respectively. [i]Those[i] are the things which are compared and deemed to be structurally the same, not the entities themselves. I don't think you can quote an atheist who ever argues the latter. The Pink Unicorn argument only purports to demonstrate the point that it is absurd to believe in something without any objective evidence whatsoever. The Pink Unicorn (who is also Invisible, let's not forget that!) is a caricature of the concept of God, designed to illustrate the absurdity of believing in either.The syllogism behind the argument goes:P: It is absurd to believe in something without objective evidence for it.
P: The Invisible Pink Unicorn has no objective evidence for it.
C: Therefore, it is absurd to believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn.Everyone accepts this syllogism, as long as it deals with the Invisible Pink Unicorn. But substitute it with God, and you have a major controversy on your hands.What I am asking is that people point out the fundamental difference between the two cases. So far, you are the only one who has come up with a concrete answer: shallowness, where I suppose you have a point.

---

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

True.The questions of this thread is why is it obvious that fairy-ism is intellectually immature while it is not obvious that theism is.The answer is because there are a lot of intellectually mature people who are theists while there are not a lot of intellectually mature people who are fairy-ists.Intellectual maturity and theism are not mutually exclusive even if you still consider theism, itself, to be intellectually immature.

Already we have run ahead of the ball. - Define Objective Evidence.